Derby
Crew Member
Source: Anchorage Daily News
https://search.app/G8mZF
https://search.app/G8mZF
IPHC @ Crossroads with the Halibut Fishery
- Thread starter Derby
- Start date
I believe we are getting way to efficient at targeting bottomfish. Between the electronics, charting, tackle and social media everyone can be a halibut rock star. There is no way you can't hammer on the resource when its possible to precision set a long line though all of the hot spots.....sucks.
searun
Well-Known Member
Removals from fisheries has been significantly higher historically as compared to the post 2012 era wherein there has been signals in the IPHC data that led to a series of reductions in catch. The real issue isn't so much fishing effort/success as it has been shifting ocean conditions that has impacted spawning recruitment....then, coupled with fishing at higher intensities than perhaps we should have been creates a double whammy. So not as much related to fishing efficiency as it has been the combined effects of setting the fishing intensity too high during periods of low spawning recruitment. FYI we fished to TCEY's and caught a little over 10 million pounds less in the period from 2013 to 2024 for example. So there has been significant reduction in fishing intensity to address poor recruitment.
IPHC staff warned last year that we are approaching the limit reference point where fishing intensity must be more significantly reduced - and steps were taken to do so in recent times, including a big reduction in 2025. The jury is still out - are there signals there has been recovery (ie. other successful spawning recruitment cohort years beyond the currently known 2012 and 2016 years). If there is no improvement, expect to see continuation of lowering fishing intensity for 2026 to help avoid fishery closures.
If my memory is correct we have been fishing at 38% SB - 8% above the limit reference point. The trigger point is falling below 30% SB. Here's a few clips from the IPHC materials:
The IPHC uses a Spawning Potential Ratio (SPR) as a measure of fishing intensity within its management framework.
2025:
Relative Spawning Biomass: The relative spawning biomass (compared to the unfished equilibrium) is estimated to be 38%, which is above the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) limit reference point of 30%. The stock is considered to be "not overfished".
IPHC staff warned last year that we are approaching the limit reference point where fishing intensity must be more significantly reduced - and steps were taken to do so in recent times, including a big reduction in 2025. The jury is still out - are there signals there has been recovery (ie. other successful spawning recruitment cohort years beyond the currently known 2012 and 2016 years). If there is no improvement, expect to see continuation of lowering fishing intensity for 2026 to help avoid fishery closures.
If my memory is correct we have been fishing at 38% SB - 8% above the limit reference point. The trigger point is falling below 30% SB. Here's a few clips from the IPHC materials:
The IPHC uses a Spawning Potential Ratio (SPR) as a measure of fishing intensity within its management framework.
- Target Level: The interim management procedure uses a target fishing intensity corresponding to an SPR of 43% (F43%), which is the level of fishing that would reduce the lifetime spawning output per recruit to 43% of the unfished level.
- Trigger Point: A trigger point is set at a relative spawning biomass of 30% (SB30%). If the stock falls below this level, the fishing intensity (SPR) is gradually reduced.
- Fishery Cut-off/Limit Point: Directed fishing is entirely halted (SPR is effectively 100%, meaning no fishing mortality for directed fisheries) if the spawning biomass reaches the limit reference point of 20% (SB20%).
2025:
Relative Spawning Biomass: The relative spawning biomass (compared to the unfished equilibrium) is estimated to be 38%, which is above the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) limit reference point of 30%. The stock is considered to be "not overfished".
Last edited:
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
Lets hope that the data IPHC uses is quite accurate for the sake of pacific halibut first and then the fishery second!
trophywife
Crew Member
all this focus on sport fisherman and biomass....
where does dragger bycatch sign up for responsibilities ? is that counted against the TAC?
where does dragger bycatch sign up for responsibilities ? is that counted against the TAC?
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Ive watched the IPHC meetings for the last 5 years, they have been robbing Peter to pay Paul in hopes of a larger younger age class coming up. I should not say in hope there was signs on those dot plots there was a big young age class.
Anecdotally from commercial fishermen I know (and what I’ve seen) the 65-80cm or so age class is very strong. Know one bc commercial guy who literally had a whole string almost full and every single one was undersized for him (81cm). He nor his brothers or dad who have been doing this for 30+ years had ever seen that before.
100% and this is what the halibut working board needs to consider. In September I heard a lot of habits changed, bad weather (our area actually had one of our best weather years yet) etc etc on excuses why we were so far under. No, the DFO's forecast model (they admit this) is based on super far back data where average fish was much larger. So we stayed way under due to that, period. As a working board we need to use REAL data from past seasons and current stock assessment data to forecast our season, not the dfo's way outdated forecast model.
There is no reason with a similar TAC (likely as we got deducted last year for overage and may have slight deduction this year so will be similar TAC) we don't have a 1/1 115cm (should be 120cm but this board is just off the charts risk adverse) at the VERY least. Data that searun and others have provided show an increase in a 1/1 max size does very little to increase caught fish...and this year we are leaving nearly 22% in the water which is INSANE.
There is no reason with a similar TAC (likely as we got deducted last year for overage and may have slight deduction this year so will be similar TAC) we don't have a 1/1 115cm (should be 120cm but this board is just off the charts risk adverse) at the VERY least. Data that searun and others have provided show an increase in a 1/1 max size does very little to increase caught fish...and this year we are leaving nearly 22% in the water which is INSANE.
Let a man be optimistic Pat! Did hear it would be decrease but “minor” not like we saw last year. some debate about set line data as was all done early in season too apparently and fishing for commies was not good until mid to end of July for whatever reason.
Regardless. We left 20-23% in water this year. That’s a lot.
Regardless. We left 20-23% in water this year. That’s a lot.
searun
Well-Known Member
I think the data will show Area 2B (Canada) had a larger decrease than most other areas. Just saying not to get hopes up for a miracle recovery.
A big part of leaving 147,000 lbs (at last count) in the water for recreational halibut has to do with the regulation choice made. With a small TAC like we had last year, the choice to implement a 1 fish limit offered no mechanism to adjust daily limits using a Variation Order. Had we shortened the season (June to Sept), that would have allowed enough TAC to continue with a choice model (1 under, 2 possession on the unders or a choice of 1 larger fish).
There is a survey people can fill out to let the SFAB know their preferences - hoping a lot of people complete the survey and give the SFAB their wishes as to how to approach shaping a fishery under these low TAC circumstances we are likely to see for a while.
Please complete the brief survey by clicking Recreational Halibut Fishery in BC – Your Input Matters before the deadline on 9 January 2026.
A big part of leaving 147,000 lbs (at last count) in the water for recreational halibut has to do with the regulation choice made. With a small TAC like we had last year, the choice to implement a 1 fish limit offered no mechanism to adjust daily limits using a Variation Order. Had we shortened the season (June to Sept), that would have allowed enough TAC to continue with a choice model (1 under, 2 possession on the unders or a choice of 1 larger fish).
There is a survey people can fill out to let the SFAB know their preferences - hoping a lot of people complete the survey and give the SFAB their wishes as to how to approach shaping a fishery under these low TAC circumstances we are likely to see for a while.
Please complete the brief survey by clicking Recreational Halibut Fishery in BC – Your Input Matters before the deadline on 9 January 2026.
searun
Well-Known Member
Tx we all did our best, now its time for me to pass the torch. More skiing and fishin, less fish politics.
Derby
Crew Member
Hello SFAB,
Happy New Year.
This is a reminder that the recreational halibut fishery survey will close on January 9. For additional details, please refer to the email below.
If you haven’t already, we encourage you to share the survey with your local SFAC members. Survey results will be shared first with the Halibut Working Group and then with the SFAB once the survey has closed.
Please complete the brief survey by clicking Recreational Halibut Fishery in BC – Your Input Matters before the deadline on 9 January 2026.
Happy New Year.
This is a reminder that the recreational halibut fishery survey will close on January 9. For additional details, please refer to the email below.
If you haven’t already, we encourage you to share the survey with your local SFAC members. Survey results will be shared first with the Halibut Working Group and then with the SFAB once the survey has closed.
Please complete the brief survey by clicking Recreational Halibut Fishery in BC – Your Input Matters before the deadline on 9 January 2026.
cohochinook
Well-Known Member
Everybody on this forum who likes to catch halibut should take the 10 minutes to complete this critical survey!
Similar threads
